linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for GCC 4.4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170929080128.eygnwju6rbegs3lh@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 29 Sep 2017 10:01:28 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@...el.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Dmitriy Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Miguel Bernal Marin <miguel.bernal.marin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, LKP <lkp@...org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for GCC 4.4


* Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 04:53:09PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@...el.com>
> > > Fixes: f5caf621ee35 ("x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for Clang")
> > > Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
> > 
> > Side note: it's not like I personally need the credit, but in general
> > I really want people to pick up on who debugged the code and pointed
> > to the solution. That's often more of the work than the fix itself.
> > 
> > The kernel test robot report looked to be ignored as a "gcc-4.4 is too
> > old to worry about" thing. People who then step up and analyze the
> > problem are rare as it is. They need to be credited in the commit
> > logs.
> > 
> > We don't have any fixed format for that, but it's pretty free-form. So
> > we have tags like
> > 
> >   Root-caused-by:
> >   Diagnosed-by:
> >   Analyzed-by:
> >   Debugged-by:
> >   Bisected-by:
> >   Fix-suggested-by:
> > 
> > etc for giving credit to people who figured out some part of a bug
> > (and, having grepped for this, we also a _shitload_ of miss-spellings
> > of various things ;)
> 
> Indeed, credit is important and I try to give it where it's due.  Sorry
> for the snub!  I anoint you with:
> 
> Debugged-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>

When applying the fix I went with:

  Diagnosed-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>

Because I think 'diagnosing' a bug is a higher category, which implies debugging. 

( Sometimes we refer to 'debugging a bug' as the reporter adding printks on 
  request and printing out key state that helps understand the bug. It does not 
  necessarily imply root-causing the bug. )

Also note that I added a "Reported-and-Bisected-by:" tag for the ktest robot, to 
further credit the fact that in addition to reporting a kernel crash, a specific 
commit was bisected to as well.

I'll wait for another round of ktest robot testing to make sure the crash is 
indeed fixed.

Thanks,

	Ingo